* * PHASE 4 WORK IN PROGRESS SCREEN SHOTS! * * FEB 2011! * *

[Lewie 7]

By the way, the HP bomber is actually Type O/400 (with the letter 'O') and not 0/400 (with the number '0'). It's a very common mistake that many people make - I've made it myself many times in the past until I found out about the system HP used for naming their different types. It was always a combination of a letter (like 'M' or 'O'), slash, and a number.

 

Glad to see our devs didn't make the same mistake.

 

Yeah you are correct, my mistake.

[Hasse Wind 46]

The HP O/400 indeed saw most of its service with the IAF, but they also took part in battles of the western front during the big offensives of 1918, so it was not purely an early strategic bomber.

[DukeIronHand 8]

The HP O/400 indeed saw most of its service with the IAF, but they also took part in battles of the western front during the big offensives of 1918, so it was not purely an early strategic bomber.

 

Interesting - I have never read an account of them at the "front".

Daylight tactical bombing? Or transportation centers behind the front? If not flown at night I wonder how their losses were against frontline Jasta's. Fully armed was not their ceiling about 15,000 feet?

[Lewie 7]

Just back from checking out the screenshots again.

 

The Type O/400 wasn't really used at the "front" as we traditionally speak of it in OFF terms IIRC.

 

Was it not used mostly with the Independent Air Force or on special raids - like on zeppelin sheds?

I know this flies in the face of that historical opus: the latest Red Baron movie!

 

Well there was a strategic bombing program that the RNAS had sort of decided was their baby, and when Trenchard combined the two forces in 1918, ( over much wrangling and protest..) the IAF (?) was formed and was used to put RNAS' strategic bombing program under. Didn't they also have an American squadron flying night bomber HP O/400's out of the Marne?

 

They did a bit of behind the lines bombing. Arch Whitehouse has described IAF Handley Page operations in his fictional WWI stories, and in reality they did a bit of Northern Flanders target softening, airfield strikes, in addition to bombing important bridges East of Brugges as the Germans were being pushed out of Belgium. I'm suprised that there wasn't more reliance upon them from the beginning, as the RNAS had a particular thorn in their side about the submarine bases in Zeebrugges, and it wasn't that far from Naval 5's airfield at Petite Synthe.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Lewie

[Hasse Wind 46]

Not much to add to Lewie's post regarding the HP's in supporting ground troops.

 

I don't have any statistics at hand about heavy bomber losses in WW1, but I know they were limited compared to WW2, and not just because the heavy bombers were much rarer in the Great War. It wasn't that easy for a WW1 fighter to shoot down one of the heavies. The fighters had very limited firepower, some bombers had at least partial armour protection (like the HP in its engines) and they had several guns for defensive fire. And the Entente air forces had many more fighters than the Germans in 1918, which also made it harder for the Germans to challenge the bomber units.

[Lewie 7]

Not much to add to Lewie's post regarding the HP's in supporting ground troops.

 

I don't have any statistics at hand about heavy bomber losses in WW1, but I know they were limited compared to WW2, and not just because the heavy bombers were much rarer in the Great War. It wasn't that easy for a WW1 fighter to shoot down one of the heavies. The fighters had very limited firepower, some bombers had at least partial armour protection (like the HP in its engines) and they had several guns for defensive fire. And the Entente air forces had many more fighters than the Germans in 1918, which also made it harder for the Germans to challenge the bomber units.

 

Well if the TW and FS-WWI HP O/400's are anywhere near to 'real', The field of fire of the rear gunner(s) was pretty good, as there was also a ventral mounted Lewis on a pintle mount of the floor through a hole in the underside.

 

The biplane tail surfaces don't block much of the upper rear gunner's arc, it's enough though, especially when you've got a determined and smart DVII pilot using it as a shield. It's a fairly fast aircraft for it's size, although it won't outrun much, it will make a chasing fighter take longer to arrive if they don't have a big height advantage.

[cptroyce 0]

WOOOOOOOW!!!!!

 

I gravitate toward the scenery and environment aspects as much as the a/c detail; so...

I love the:

 

clouds and cloud layers

 

the take off and landing ruts on the airfields

 

did I perceive the "curvature of the earth" in that pic with the Dr1? If that's not new, I have not noticed it before.

 

the cockpits are amazing

 

P4 is going to be terrific..looking forward to all the "bells and whistles"!

 

 

Regards,

Royce

[CaptSopwith 18]

WOOOOOOOW!!!!!

 

I gravitate toward the scenery and environment aspects as much as the a/c detail; so...

I love the:

 

clouds and cloud layers

 

the take off and landing ruts on the airfields

 

did I perceive the "curvature of the earth" in that pic with the Dr1? If that's not new, I have not noticed it before.

 

the cockpits are amazing

 

P4 is going to be terrific..looking forward to all the "bells and whistles"!

 

 

Regards,

Royce

 

The promise of P4 seems to be bringing us old timers out! How have you been Royce? Nice to see your name pop up again. Cheers!

[cptroyce 0]

Capt Sopwith -

 

I 'm fine; thank you for asking..flying OFF, checking the forum daily, waiting for P4..like everyone else.

 

Have you finished your studies? I recall you were just starting college back in the RB3D days.

 

Your opus on the history, evolution, and modding of RB3D was incredible.. hope they still have it posted somewhere.

 

Regards,

Royce

Edited February 12, 2011 by cptroyce

[CaptSopwith 18]

Capt Sopwith -

 

I 'm fine; thank you for asking..flying OFF, checking the forum daily, waiting for P4..like everyone else.

 

Have you finished your studies? I recall you were just starting college back in the RB3D days.

 

Your opus on the history, evolution, and modding of RB3D was incredible.. hope they still have it posted somewhere.

 

Regards,

Royce

 

 

Glad to hear you're well. I'm doing fine too - I finished college back in '06 and now I'm finishing my MA thesis and awaiting PhD programs to give me their high sign so I know where I'll be living in six months! I'm professorship bound - God willing. I wouldn't trade it for the world.

 

I'm glad you liked that old history of RB article! I think the only place left that has it is OvS's archived Hell's Angels page here http://www.hellsange...om/history.htm. My writing feels worlds different from the kid that wrote that article over six years ago - time is really flying! I'll have to go back and re-read it sometime.

 

This is the reason why I visit the OFF board more than any others - I still see names of friends I remember from years ago. I'm glad you're doing well Royce. Keep in touch and keep flying!

Edited February 13, 2011 by _CaptSopwith

[Bullethead 12]

Not much to add to Lewie's post regarding the HP's in supporting ground troops.

 

One of the ebooks Lou linked up for us is Green Balls, written by an HP observer. It's quite interesting.

 

But anyway, screenshots... SCHWEET!!!!!

[ricnunes 1]

Just back from checking out the screenshots again.

 

The Type O/400 wasn't really used at the "front" as we traditionally speak of it in OFF terms IIRC.

 

Was it not used mostly with the Independent Air Force or on special raids - like on zeppelin sheds?

I know this flies in the face of that historical opus: the latest Red Baron movie!

 

 

I don't know how the HP O/400 will be used in OFF P4 (which kind of missions will we fly with it) but we all know that the OFF map is very, very big covering areas from Britain to all of France, most in not all of Germany and even parts of northern Italy, resuming the entire WWI western front! Therefore all strategical missions that the HP O/400 did during WWI can be simulated in OFF (and within its map).

[JFM 18]

Great screens, thanks!

 

BTW, take that, all you "be patient" types. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, eh Morris?

[DukeIronHand 8]

In regards to the tactical uses of the HP series I just re-read (for the umpteenth time) a section of Billy Mitchell's war diary. Never paid much attention to this passage until now.

 

He speaks of requesting help of British "Bombardment aviation" (A/C type unspecified) in the summer of 1918 and the British responding with a "brigade" of bomber A/C and several squadrons of single-seater escorts. IIRC the IAF had Sopwith Camels attached to it for escort purposes. Wonder why the Camel and not the SE5 which, on its face, would appear to be a good (or better) escort plane?

 

Anyway, Mitchell states the British were used in a "low level" raid just behind the front targeting ammo dumps. Time of day for the attack is not specified but he states the British lost 12 aircraft - type not specified but you are left with the impression it was bomber A/C.

 

As an additional tidbit he states a British "aviation general" (IAF CiC Trenchard?) accompanied this force.

 

Sounds like the IAF to me.

[Crossbones 1]

Impressive once again! Thanks for updates.

 

Crossbones

Edited February 13, 2011 by Crossbones

[carrick58 23]

WOW, Just loved it.

[Hasse Wind 46]

One of the ebooks Lou linked up for us is Green Balls, written by an HP observer. It's quite interesting.

 

Hey, thanks for the tip. I didn't know that. Such WW1 books are not exactly common.

[Wodin 0]

Makes a fantastic change to see developers respond to the request of their fans...we asked for some and we got some...and they are fantastic...are the shadows in the cockpit static like in the Se5a at the moment..or are they proper shadows?

 

P4 with, can you possibly imagine, an enhanced campaign is going to put others to shame I feel.

 

A better Campaign than the current one is really what has me excited. I hope we see some campaign screenshots, duty room etc etc.

Edited February 13, 2011 by Wodin

[DukeIronHand 8]

As an addition to my previous post reference use of the HP's at the front I just re-read portions of Mitchell's book so to amplify on my previous:

 

The "brigade" mentioned was 3 squadrons of bombardment planes and 4 squadrons of single-seaters - types still not specified.

 

The raid was conducted in broad daylight from an altitude of 200' and British losses were 12 bombers. Fighter losses, if any, were not mentioned.

 

This attack was close enough to the front that it was witnessed by U.S. ground troops.

 

This is per Mitchell who was quite opinionated and has no love for the British while he talks up the French but he seems to always have a grasp for the facts...at least in WW1.

Edited February 14, 2011 by DukeIronHand

[Bullethead 12]

IIRC the IAF had Sopwith Camels attached to it for escort purposes. Wonder why the Camel and not the SE5 which, on its face, would appear to be a good (or better) escort plane?

 

Independent Force proper was formed from VIII Brigade RAF plus attachments. On the day it was officially designated the IAF (6 June 1918), it comprised:

• 100 Squadron (FE2): Night bomber
• 216 Squadron (ex-RNAS No. 16, HP O/400): Night bomber
• 55 Squadron (DH4): Day bomber
• 99 Squadron (DH9): Day bomber
• 104 Squadron (DH9): Day bomber

The 1st 3 were the original components of VIII Brigade, the latter 2 joined in May 1918. Since October 1917, VIII Brigade had been primarily attacking targets just behind the lines in direct support of ground units, although they also did the odd deep raid (mostly at night). Once IAF was formed, deep missions became almost the sole business of IAF, although they did do a few direct support missions toward the end of the war. The above day bomber squadrons were 41st Wing.

 

From this point until the Armistice, the daylight side of IAF was reinforced as follows:

 

 

• 110 Squadron (DH9a): Day bomber, joined 1 Sep 1918
• 45 Squadron (Camels): joined 22 Sep 1918

These 2 squadrons formed 85th Wing. 45 Squadron had just come from the Italian Front and were on the short list to get Snipes fitted with long-range tanks to be able to escort the day bombers there and back, but due to delays with the Snipe, this never happened. 45 wasn't re-equipped until Jan 1919. Thus, 45's main role was defensive patrol over the IAF bases while the bombers were forming and struggling up in circles (which usually took more than an hour), after which the Camels were about out of gas. And AFAIK, they never did actual escort even for short-range targets, but were more into close air support.

 

The night side looked like this:

 

 

• 97 Squadron (HP O/400), joined 6 June 1918
• 100 Squadron re-equipped with HP O/400 on 10 Aug 1918
• 115 Squadron (HP O/400), joined 29 Aug 1918
• 215 Squadron (ex-RNAS 15, HP O/400), joined 6 June 1918
• 216 Squadron: as above

So, in answer to your 2nd question, the reason for Camels instead of SE5s was that they were supposed to be Snipes, but that didn't happen ;).

 

 

 

 

[DukeIronHand 8]

So, in answer to your 2nd question, the reason for Camels instead of SE5s was that they were supposed to be Snipes, but that didn't happen ;).

 

Ah...well that explains it then.

 

And I had forgotten that the HP's were really not the main plane of the IAF...at least in the daytime...which may say a lot about their actual (or perceived) chances against fighter opposition. Under load they could not fly that high IIRC and probably weren't that fast hence their use in the night role.

 

Its funny how you study and read about a subject for (literally) decades, in my case, and then have to re-learn it because of all you forget. Guess the subject will always be fresh!

 

EDIT: And, as a Part 2, the bombers mentioned in Mitchell's diary were almost certainly DH4's and 9's and not the HP's. Thanks BH!

Edited February 14, 2011 by DukeIronHand

[Bullethead 12]

And I had forgotten that the HP's were really not the main plane of the IAF...at least in the daytime...which may say a lot about their actual (or perceived) chances against fighter opposition. Under load they could not fly that high IIRC and probably weren't that fast hence their use in the night role.

 

According to Green Balls, HPs climbed at 50-55 knots and cruised at about 60, and the highest I've read so far of him going is 7500 feet.

 

The specification that the HPs were built to was, IIRC, expressly for a "night bomber". I suppose this was at least partly due to Brit experience vs. Gothas in 1917. After the losses sustained in just a few (like 3-5 max) daylight raids, the Germans switched to night operations. And the Gothas flew rather higher than the HPs, apparently.

 

The single-engined day bombers of the IAF had a rough time, too, despite being faster. For the most part, they took acceptable losses day-to-day from flak and the home defense fighters (Kets). The Kets were mostly inexperienced pilots in inferior planes attacking in fairly small numbers which the bomber formations could largely hold off. But every couple of weeks or so, a squadron would meet a full-strength, frontline Jasta in D.VIIs and get practically annihilated. This mostly happened to the DH9 squadrons because they had inferior performance compared to the DH4.

 

For a very detailed history of the daily operations of the IAF's day squadrons, I recommend Independent Force, by Keith Rennles.

[tranquillo 10]

I find it hard to believe that we're still looking at the cfs3 engine. Amazing work - can't wait.

[Hasse Wind 46]

According to Green Balls, HPs climbed at 50-55 knots and cruised at about 60, and the highest I've read so far of him going is 7500 feet.

 

The specification that the HPs were built to was, IIRC, expressly for a "night bomber". I suppose this was at least partly due to Brit experience vs. Gothas in 1917. After the losses sustained in just a few (like 3-5 max) daylight raids, the Germans switched to night operations. And the Gothas flew rather higher than the HPs, apparently.

 

 

The HP was certainly no high altitude bomber. If it had a full load of fuel and bombs, climbing even to 7000 feet must have taken ages (50 minutes? An hour?) compared to any fighter plane. The Gothas on the other hand had much better flying characteristics, and were able to climb faster and higher. But they also carried less bombs and didn't have as much defensive firepower.

 

I hope there will be good bomber campaigns in OFF P4. It would be something to fly a long night mission against some target deep behind enemy lines. With my navigational skills, I'll probably never find any of the targets.

[Olham 164]

Just back from Ostfriesland, and you guys have these fine welcome pics for me - stunning!

 

And Widowmaker - I do want to be the Hun!

With these refined cockpits and models, I can't wait for the first encounter with such a British "biggie" as the HP.

Or to shoot away the Snipe around you! Mmuahahahahaaaaa!!!

 

The new S.E.5 will definitely lure me to change sides for some carreers, though!

 

Winder, your winter landscapes definitely look better than in "the other sim".